Documenting social justice in library and information science research: a literature review

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to provide an overview of social justice research in library and information science (LIS) literature in order to identify the research quantity, what populations or settings were included and future directions for this area of the discipline through examination of when related research was published, what contexts it covered and what contributions LIS researchers have made in this research area.Design/methodology/approachThis study reviews results from two LIS literature databases—Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (LISTA) and Library and Information Science Source (LISS)—that use the term “social justice” in title, abstract or full text to explicitly or implicitly describe their research.FindingsThis review of the literature using the term social justice to describe LIS research recognizes the significant increase in quantities of related research over the first two decades of the 21st century as well as the emergence of numerous contexts in which that research is situated. The social justice research identified in the literature review is further classified into two primary contribution categories: indirect action (i.e. steps necessary for making change possible) or direct action (i.e. specific steps, procedures and policies to implement change).Research limitations/implicationsThe findings of this study provide a stronger conceptualization of the contributions of existing social justice research through examination of past work and guides next steps for the discipline.Practical implicationsThe conceptualizations and related details provided in this study help identify gaps that could be filled by future scholarship.Originality/valueWhile social justice research in LIS has increased in recent years, few studies have explored the landscape of existing research in this area.

Analysis of anti-racism, equity, inclusion and social justice initiatives in library and information science literature

“…For this study, research questions and analyses are similar in some respects to previous studies (Mongeon et al. , 2021; Sung and Parboteeah, 2017; Winberry and Bishop, 2021), but provide new information about the current status of LIS literature. Unlike Sung and Parboteeah (2017), this study was not limited to a subset of high impact journals and included journals across three LIS databases to be more broadly inclusive.…”

“…, 2021; Sung and Parboteeah, 2017). Social and political movements and unrest motivated libraries, LIS professionals, and researchers to participate in scholarship on these critical areas (Winberry and Bishop, 2021). This type of scholarly work has been promoted and published by sources such as Library Trends , Library Quarterly and Advances in Librarianships , which embrace a variety of perspectives, approaches, trends in professional librarianship and the role of libraries in communities and society (Insight, 2022; Johns Hopkins University Press, 2020; The University of Chicago Press Journals, 2021).…”

“…(2021) conducted a bibliometric analysis of race-related research in LIS during the last 40 years and noted that while there is an increasing amount of race and racism-focused literature, it still makes up only a small portion of total LIS scholarship and is cited less than other, equivalent LIS research. Winberry and Bishop (2021) reviewed social justice research in the LIS literature in the past 20 years and found that despite an increase in the amount of literature available over time, and the wide range of contexts in which the studies appeared, few studies have investigated the research landscape of this area.…”

Intellectual freedom and alternative priorities in library and information science research: A longitudinal study

“…The literature on the meaning and practice of intellectual freedom and neutrality is vast; because of the bibliometric nature of this study, this review is therefore focused on how these topics manifest in the LIS literature. Recent work by Winberry and Bishop (2021), on the subject of the influence and frequency of conceptions of social justice in the LIS literature, has documented a sharp rise in works using that terminology beginning in 2014. It is also important to note that many of what this study classifies as “alternative priorities” fly under the flag of “critical x” approaches.…”

Operationalizing Theories and Methods to Integrate Social Justice in LIS Scholarship

“…LIS professionals have played a limited role in applying their theory development and methods applications (amongst other efforts) to mobilize actions in supporting the recent public outcry for an immediate stop to human rights violations of African Americans and other racial minorities in the United States (Carney, 2016;Lebron, 2017;Mehra, 2021c). LIS professionals now have this potential to extend their scholarship from its shackles of a limited past and current constraints (Winberry & Bishop, 2021). The contextual situatedness in this current problematic racial age and political divisiveness in its scale of horror, which includes: implications of racial violence, propensity of white resistance to justice, degree of intensity in the public outrage, and its national-and-global spread has now forced complacent LIS scholars and educators (amongst others) around the world to integrate action-oriented social justice efforts of community activism, racial advocacy, and progressive change (Mehra, 2021b;Cooke 2020).…”